Right up front: There are some definite racist elements here, and that certainly diminished my ability to enjoy the book. But even without those, it was disappointing.

I like reading Holmes & Watson as characters, but the other characters weren’t interesting at all, and the mystery itself wasn’t much to chew on. Mostly it seemed like Doyle imagined this tale of the purloined loot itself, and the whole book was a lead-up to the retelling of that tale. But it would have been better as a standalone story, really, and even then I don’t think I’d have loved it. ( )

such fun!! a bit ramble-y at the end, but i had a great time reading this again. it's been years, and years since the last read - and i remembered nothing. oops! watson and sherlock are such comfortable characters, so it's great to be revisiting them again now. ( )

This is my least favorite of all the Sherlock Holmes novels. I’d probably give it 3.5 stars, if we had half-star ratings. What I liked: Even though its tone is very dark, it fits the story, since this novel is all about the evils of colonialism. Its villain is well fleshed out, as are the supporting characters. It’s got a strong female character, whom Sherlock even praises for her “genius” (his word). There is some good humor here, too, as when Watson, overcome by Mary’s beauty, gets tongue-tied and says some really goofy things. There is subtlety here, too, with Sherlock’s character. He seems vulnerable here in a way that he generally doesn’t, and I get the strong impression that he is lying to Watson when he mentions how little notice he (Holmes) takes of the opposite sex. He seems very much affected by women, both here and in later stories, and his denial seems forced, almost desperate. There’s definitely some room for interepretation here. My impression is that Holmes likes being in control of everything, and women, who can prompt strong emotional reactions in men, are a threat to that control. And I really love that Doyle went out of his way on a couple different occasions to mention Watson’s limp. His army backstory is a constant presence here, and it adds still more depth to an already interesting character. And romance! Watson does not talk about himself enough in these stories, so it was nice seeing him get a love story here.

What I didn’t like: Okay, I’m gonna come right out and say it. Sherlock is mean to Watson! This is the story where he crosses the line from lovably egotistical to just plain rude, and Watson must really love this man to keep on forgiving him like that. I do like that Holmes’ behavior isn’t excused; Watson really IS hurt by the comments, and Holmes even apologizes in one place. But Holmes’ egotism and self-centeredness reach their peak in this story, and that can be difficult. I also didn’t like how bleak everything turned out. So many characters are corrupt, and even the decent ones aren’t always great, and most elements of the story don’t really end well (although some do). There is a fairly long flashback scene near the end, but it doesn’t really add much. It doesn’t really make the villain more sympathetic; neither does it flesh out the victim in any meaningful way. The flashback in “Scarlet” did both of these things. Although this book has some beautiful moments, it’s just not my cup of tea. ( )

A Masterpiece.
After more years than I care to remember, and numerous TV adaptations I read this book again and was not disappointed.

Completely and utterly recommended. ( )

Not as good as "The Study in Scarlet" ( )

The Sign of Four was intriguing classic mystery and fabulous sequel that revolved around best duo in history of literature pursuing another case of Indian treasure and murder. It was about greed, vengeance, betrayal, trust, friendship and methods of deduction.

Writing was amazing, gripping and fast paced. It was written in first person narrative from Watson’s perspective. Setting of England was atmospheric. Author packed lot of things in just few pages.

Mystery was fascinating. It was amazing to read Sherlock’s observations and descriptions on how he figured out identity of culprit and the case. I liked reading about shortest community of Adaman Island, the tribal people.

Culprit’s side of story on Indian treasure was most interesting. It was second best part to Sherlock’s description on case and the way he solved it.

Overall, The Sign of Four was intriguing, suspenseful, and well written historical fiction and mystery. I see why it’s a classic.

I highly recommend this. if you enjoy,
Classics
Murder mystery
Quirky character
descriptive narration
some interesting quotable lines

QOTD: Which is your favourite Classic mystery?

Full review - https://booksteacupreviews.com/2021/07/15/the-sign-of-four-sherlock-holmes-2-by-... ( )

This was significantly worse than the first story, mostly because there was almost no mystery. Stuff was presented as Holmes discovered it, and he never made any mistakes. Disappointing. ( )

After being disappointed with "A Study in Scarlet", I decided to tackle a second Holmes novel in the hopes that things would improve. Sadly, they didn't. I'm not beaten yet - I'll be attempting "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" as my next train-to-work novel - but so far, this doesn't do anything for me.

There are some good elements here: Holmes of course is an enjoyable response to the crime fiction that existed at the time. His methods of deduction, while sometimes ponderous, are always clever. Unfortunately, there's very little else to be said for this book.

Watson continues to be an uninteresting narrator; the supporting characters are mostly forgettable, with the exception (oddly) of the police characters, who so far I have found pleasant; and Holmes himself, as many other reviewers seem to note, is at his least likeable here. Obviously, we're supposed to be somewhat confounded by his aloof personality, but his treatment of other members of the human race is extremely off-putting. Like the 2000s versions - Dr. House, etc. - it's supposedly tempered by his desire to help the innocent and fearful, but really the fact that he only seems to have a heart for small children just leads me to assume he is a sociopath.

And then there is the mystery itself: here, Conan Doyle reveals himself as mostly a pulp writer, it seems. Like "A Study in Scarlet", this mystery is decidedly outlandish: cannibalistic midgets, wooden legs, etc, etc. Yes it's escapism and I accept that, but the problem is these mysteries are almost tailor-made for Sherlock Holmes. No human being could possibly be expected to guess from a simple murder that it involved so many elaborate contrivances and foreign devils. It seems strange to say it, but if Holmes could instead investigate a (complex) drawing-room mystery or the like, I might be drawn into the work more, as this would require him to piece together clues within my human scope of comprehension. I'm not asking for an easy mystery, just one that has more of a human element.

Anyway, I'll be interested to continue reading the Holmes books (although I may slow down, as I do have the rest of my life), and perhaps find out why he has become such a mythical figure! ( )

I liked this more than Doyle's first Sherlock novella, at least the writing and most of the character development. The first page was a shock though, with Sherlock being portrayed as a morphine addict. I wish Doyle had not gone there with this character, especially if it was for shock value. Evidently Doyle wrote this after a chance encounter with Oscar Wilde so I wonder how much of the story, if any, was influenced by that meeting. ( )

The second novella recounting the exploits of Sherlock Holmes shares a peculiar structural feature with the first, A Study in Scarlet: a tale within the tale. The second, told at length by the freshly apprehended culprit, is the crime behind the crime, the reason why he intrepidly executed vengeance. This doesn’t free him of guilt for the fresher crime, nor does he expect it to, but it casts what has been done in a softer light.
The earlier crime occurs elsewhere — exotic locales like the Utah territory and the Indian subcontinent.
Not that any of this impresses Holmes. At the end of the tale of the Agra treasure, he only remarks to the wooden-legged Jonathan Small about the more recent crime: “You brought your own rope. That I did not know.”
A second shared feature, more prominently on display here than in the first book, is the blithe racist remarks. Watson, who records the Holmes cases, unreflectingly shares the prejudices of his day and sees the world, or at least its population, in strictly black-and-white terms. The blacks include the inhabitants of India, whose revolt against their imperial masters seems incomprehensible.
I don’t suggest that the Holmes canon be subjected to the same mutilation that Dahl and others are undergoing. This book reflects the attitudes of London 1890; let it stand.
This is particularly true because the tale subverts its own racial attitudes in a way that escapes Watson and may have also escaped Doyle. “The Four” of the title are four men who have been cheated. Small is one; the other three are Sikhs. These four hold faith with each other. They are robbed of their (stolen) treasure by a white man, a British officer, no less.
Book banners might also want to know that the book opens with Holmes injecting himself with a seven percent solution of cocaine. Reading this for the first time as an impressionable thirteen-year-old didn’t turn me into an intravenous drug user. ( )

The 2nd story immediately introduces Holmes's needle dependence on cocaine, which he uses when overcome with ennui at the absence of a case to solve. One finally comes in the form of Mary Morstan (Watson's future wife), and we are taken to the outskirts of London, to flashbacks in India, and on a suspenseful boat chase down the Thames, all while viewing the negative effects of Victorian social status and colonialism. #whataride ( )

A classic story with all the memes, a lost treasure, a "hideous" face in the window, a carriage chase, high speed pursuit on the Thames and so on. This is the story that introduces Toby the super-sniffing dog. Sherlock's disturbing cocaine habit is featured.
Read for the British Authors Challenge
audiobook 1/28/2024 ( )

Hired by a young lady, Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson investigate the strange recent deaths of her missing father's friends from the army, as well as the whereabouts of the Great Mogul, the second-largest diamond in the world.

The Sign of the Four (1890), also called The Sign of Four , is the second novel featuring Sherlock Holmes by British writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. It's themes deal with evil, justice, Victorian fear, empire and imperialism. The Sign of the Four has a complex plot involving service in India, the Indian Mutiny of 1857, a stolen treasure, and a secret pact among four convicts ("the Four" of the title) and two corrupt prison guards.

The Sign of the Four is an improvement over A Study in Scarlet, and is preceded by one of the best in the canon, The Hound of the Baskervilles.

The Sign of the Four is a complex mystery that features more of what we love about Sherlock and Watson (Sherlock's cunning, cold deductions, Watson's emotions and wonderment) yet it's language can be quite dated and the mystery is almost too much of a labyrinth. Still a worthwhile read though!



( )

This was fine, and by that I mean satisfactory (not superior). I don't recall reading this particular Sherlock Holmes story previously. It was good enough but definitely not the best I've read. I would possibly read it again if I had nothing else to hand but I still don't think it's a keeper (so will be passing it along) ( )

I'm slowly making my way through the Sherlock Holmes stories for the first time. This was not my favorite. The mystery wasn't nearly as interesting as others have been; in fact, it was a bit bizarre. It's the book where Watson meets the woman he ends up marrying, but that relationship didn't grow in any particularly interesting way either. Overall, the story just felt slow and not very memorable. ( )

Excellent! ( )

This is very clever story and extremely well written. This is one of my favorite Sherlock Holmes mysteries. I listened to the edition read by Stephen Fry; honestly, he does a brilliant job of reading. ( )

It's the 19th century, so I shouldn't be surprised that Watson marries the girl, considering how little of an impact she makes. ( )

For me, the story is full of mystery and it's even more exciting how sherlock holmes solved it. I love it. ( )

I didn't think that this story was as good as the short stories in The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes or The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes. The romance of Dr. Watson was a nice subplot, though. ( )

If the first book is weirdly structured, this one is much more like your average crime novel. Our heroes, Holmes and Watson, are thrown right into the mystery, and are the first ones at the crime scene, giving them plenty of time to solve the mystery before the police show up and arrest the wrong man. We don't spend half the novel reading the back story of the bad guy, only the last chapter where he gets to explain himself (of course, he was not really a "bad" guy, he was only seeking what was rightfully his. No bad guys admiring their massive penises in a mirror for no apparent reason - take note, Dan Brown!).

And also, Watson gets laid, so good for him! ( )

I really liked this. It was much better than A Study in Scarlet. It was much more action packed and riveting. It was fast paced and the mystery was fascinating. The romance between Watson and Mary was a little odd but sweet enough. What we did see of Mary I liked. She seemed very intelligent and genuine. Holmes was much more like the later versions - brilliant and brutal with observations. He could be rather blunt and intense. I was surprised to see him using cocaine. I hadn't realised that Elementary (the tv show) had incorporated the original material when portraying Sherlock as an addict. And I'm sure it said somewhere in A Study in Scarlet about the unlikeliness of Holmes using drugs. Anyway overall fast paced mystery with some interesting twists. ( )

interesting and engaging story ( )

The pages turned quickly enough, but the mystery lacked stakes and general intrigue. I had very little reason to care and the reveal didn’t make me care any more than I did at the start. Watson gets a wife out of it, and I like that personal character stuff, but there’s not much to remember in this one other than that or Sherlock’s cocaine habit.

To be honest, I feel kind of guilty to have enjoyed "The Sign of Four". During the first half of it, the novel was not nearly as good as "A Study in Scarlet", but then everything twisted and turned and tampered and I was basically so hooked I couldn't take this story down.

One advantage of Arthur Conan Doyle's writing in this novel has certainly been his decision not to include a random plot switch like he did in "A Study in Scarlet". The mystery's solution was actually told through John Watson's perspective rather than within a long-winded narrative about the murderer. Thus, the reader is able to follow Watson and Sherlock through the entirety of this novel, and yet ... the beginning was boring as hell. I know, I know. We had a murder. We had a treasure. We had Mary. We had John. We had Sherlock. But ... whew.

To explain my feelings about this book more precisely: The first half included a lot of different interesting aspects, e.g. Sherlock's explicit use of cocaine as well as his ways to explain why he takes it, and the introduction of Mary Morstan. But I couldn't get rid of the feeling to be alienated from Watson, as though it wasn't really possible to get inside his head and take a look not only at the murder case, but also at the interesting characters surrounding this case, namely Sherlock, John himself and Mary. I think I like Mary's TV version with the brilliant Amanda Abbington more, because Arthur Conan Doyle kept her character on a rather one-dimensional level. In addition, the fast-building romance between John and Mary was weird to witness as a reader, because John's behaviour seemed quite irrational and rash, even for him.

On the other side, Arthur Conan Doyle was able to write some breathtaking scenes, including a pursuit and an interesting perspective on the Indian Rebellion - but the plot was mostly foreseeable from the beginning of the second half on, so the story was never able to really surprise me.

In conclusion, it was a good novel and offered an enjoyable read, but no excellent one. ( )